SimPvP and its Future (manifesto) [long rant]

[KoriJenkins]

I'll be honest, I don't know what the point of this debate is anymore and tbh I don't know what more clipchip wants aside from AntHand banned.

AntHand has essentially been depowered. According to him he's asked for permission to use 5 exploits since and has been told no on all of them. I'm fairly certain he's on thin ice and effectively depowered, and if you think Yukarion is truly biased against him, he wouldn't have left his alt festering below the Nether where it can never leave until it falls into the void.

I've been told by ost basically the same things Yukar is saying here, that he's constantly harassed by people over a single decision made months ago. That somehow it's bias. Yeah, maybe other players wouldn't have been banned in AntHand's shoes. Maybe he managed to talk himself out of a situation others wouldn't be able to. Maybe it was the wrong decision to not jail him or punish him in any way.

I just don't see how harassing and shaming the admin team will work. You might convince them with a debate, not accusing them of bias, stupidity, and incompetence.

[clipchip]

I'll be honest, I don't know what the point of this debate is anymore and tbh I don't know what more clipchip wants aside from AntHand banned.

As it is now the admins are saying "If you were affected by this exploit and had all of your time on the server ruined we will do nothing about it, no matter who you are". Everyone should be upset with this response if they believed simpvp was a good place to play free of cheating and not just 2b2t without a queue.

If the admins want to take responsibility for allowing this exploit they should attempt to fix the situation they caused. This means all the bases discovered by the exploit should be rolled back, and if possible any important items that were stolen should be restored at the request of members. Even if the members raided their own bases, it should be safe to assume that was the result of admins allowing an exploit and so the bases should be reverted if they wish along with the coordinates being treated as not public similar to other bases found by cheating.

Even if AntHand isn't banned fixing the outcome of the mistake itself shouldn't be seen as unreasonably demanding or somehow delusional to expect.

[Yukar9]

I'm not fundamentally against the idea of restoring those bases. The community has been trying to create a base restoration policy, though what they've drafted so far would not include those bases. If you believe those bases should be restored, try to engage with the people writing that policy.

[Burger]

Most of the bases AntHand griefed with the exploit were too long ago to restore. More recently I'm only aware of Three Words, which is a grey area since the exploit was probably only allowed because AntHand deceived the admins. Personally I maintain that base restoration should only happen when the base was destroyed by 100% certainly illegal means, which Three Words wasn't.

[KoriJenkins]

Most of the bases AntHand griefed with the exploit were too long ago to restore. More recently I'm only aware of Three Words, which is a grey area since the exploit was probably only allowed because AntHand deceived the admins. Personally I maintain that base restoration should only happen when the base was destroyed by 100% certainly illegal means, which Three Words wasn't.

The main bases in question are Wilburia and Three Words. Three Words, if I'm correct, is still largely intact. Wilburia was griefed by the owners. You could argue in Three Words' case that the coordinates should be made private again (easy to do).

With Wilburia it was too long ago sadly. I think you could make the case if Wilburia can't be fixed, Three Words shouldn't be either.

[clipchip]

It seems a bit odd to me that the official base restoration policy would need an admin malpractice clause and exact specifications on how it needs to be handled in the future. I mean hopefully this doesn't happen again? Seems like kind of a cop-out to make players write up how the admins will fix their own mistakes, but this is what I would add onto whatever official policy is made:

If an admin intentionally allows someone to cheat or abuses their own powers which leads to the destruction of a base then that base can be restored. Unlike other types of base restoration this is not limited to {whatever normal time frame is decided on for the rest of the policy} as evidence of this happening can go hidden for much longer than other types of cheating and instead enforcement is left to the discretion of the admins involved.
This would cover cases such as:

• An admin gives a player permission to use an exploit which is decided to be bannable after further discussion, as the player had permission to cheat it may be unreasonable to ban them, and so the fault of any damage done falls to the admins.
• An admin intentionally allows someone to break the rules by letting them go unpunished, for example knows someone xrayed a portal yet chooses to do nothing.
• An admin cheats using information or abilities they only have as an admin, such as leaking coordinates they shouldn't know, teleporting themselves or others to bases and destroying them, or anything else deemed admin abuse after the fact.

The main bases in question are Wilburia and Three Words.

As far as I'm aware AntHand also used the exploit to raid at least Pepe's Holy Land and it wouldn't surprise me if all/some of the other raided francis bases during that war were found using it as well.

With Wilburia it was too long ago sadly.

Completely arbitrary, there are no good reasons why that base couldn't (and shouldn't) be restored as well.

[TonTheKidRS]

With Wilburia it was too long ago sadly. I think you could make the case if Wilburia can't be fixed, Three Words shouldn't be either.

Not necessarily. I was brought to Wilburia and asked to take a world download after it was abandoned by the members.

[KoriJenkins]

With Wilburia it was too long ago sadly. I think you could make the case if Wilburia can't be fixed, Three Words shouldn't be either.

Not necessarily. I was brought to Wilburia and asked to take a world download after it was abandoned by the members.

Yukar specifically wanted a 90 day time limit due to block log limitations. He has no real desire to world edit bases back in or use litematica or any program to paste them directly. Prefers rolling back chunks.

ostrich1414 says he doesn't care about Wilburia.

Three Words is 99% intact. The only thing there that was lost were items which can't be restored currently.

[KoriJenkins]

It seems a bit odd to me that the official base restoration policy would need an admin malpractice clause and exact specifications on how it needs to be handled in the future. I mean hopefully this doesn't happen again? Seems like kind of a cop-out to make players write up how the admins will fix their own mistakes, but this is what I would add onto whatever official policy is made:

If an admin intentionally allows someone to cheat or abuses their own powers which leads to the destruction of a base then that base can be restored. Unlike other types of base restoration this is not limited to {whatever normal time frame is decided on for the rest of the policy} as evidence of this happening can go hidden for much longer than other types of cheating and instead enforcement is left to the discretion of the admins involved.
This would cover cases such as:

• An admin gives a player permission to use an exploit which is decided to be bannable after further discussion, as the player had permission to cheat it may be unreasonable to ban them, and so the fault of any damage done falls to the admins.
• An admin intentionally allows someone to break the rules by letting them go unpunished, for example knows someone xrayed a portal yet chooses to do nothing.
• An admin cheats using information or abilities they only have as an admin, such as leaking coordinates they shouldn't know, teleporting themselves or others to bases and destroying them, or anything else deemed admin abuse after the fact.

The main bases in question are Wilburia and Three Words.

As far as I'm aware AntHand also used the exploit to raid at least Pepe's Holy Land and it wouldn't surprise me if all/some of the other raided francis bases during that war were found using it as well.

With Wilburia it was too long ago sadly.

Completely arbitrary, there are no good reasons why that base couldn't (and shouldn't) be restored as well.

That stuff isn't included in the policy because it can be added in the future. It was already agreed upon that WIlburia and Three Words would not be included due to time issues. The idea is that the policy remain somewhat vague and... lacking because it gives people a chance to request things not included by it, which would lead to its expansion.

Believe me, we tried that route, adding every conceivable thing known to man, planning for every hypothetical, but there were always more, and we would've spent months adding to it rather than adding it.

[Burger]

The time constraint is due to limitations in the block log plugin. If that can be changed, then the time limit should be extended or removed. Base restoration would ideally be rare and only in clear-cut unambiguous cases of wrongdoing, which Wilburia and Three Words etc are not.

More clauses would be added as and when they're necessary; we've decided on a basic policy to start. If an admin abused their power to grief a base like you said, it would obviously be restored, but it would be a waste of time to explicitly list every possible scenario in the policy.